Yes, I'm laser focused on how lawyers lead—how we *learn* to lead—as I prep to teach just this to @vanderbiltlaw students, and . . .

As I read @jaesunum's post on @Legal_Ev, all I can think: we are failing to train lawyers to make these important moral (yes, moral) decisions.👇

I genuinely question whether we train law students and lawyers to operate in the way Jae urges us to.

Note, I agree with Jae: "Big business and their legal counsel have the opportunity to steer capitalism to a gentler and fairer recovery, but the clock is ticking.
👇
The reckoning we face in the post-pandemic reality is not one of cancel culture but widespread calamity and increasing risk to our lives and livelihoods."

Both the opportunity and obligation (yes, I believe it is an obligation) we in law face are enormous.

And,
we lawyers are for the most part completely unprepared.

To wit: we do not train new lawyers for this world. We continue to train them primarily for the 2nd industrial revolution, which ended 100+ years ago.

"The intrinsic tension between BigLaw’s growth imperative
: 👇
(read: make more money) and corporate legal’s perpetual grind to do more with less (read: spend less money) is bad for our industry. The resulting distraction, however, is bad for the world. It’s long past time to ask the really important questions.

👇
Why is corporate misconduct on the rise? How do we reverse the trend? How do lawyers working at the biggest companies and law firms in the world actually leave that world a better place?" - @jaesunum https://t.co/ZxbwaMFi3F

Are we asking law students these questions?

👇
Are we asking lawyers these questions?

Are we incentivizing or prioritizing behavior and choices in legal professionals responsive to these questions?

Are we giving law students and lawyers tools to be contributors to solutions that address these challenges?

👇
Are we giving them tools to LEAD in this way?

I submit that, for the most part, we are not.

In fact, I observe we teach law students things that lead them in the opposite direction. And the training and incentives they encounter in corporate law firms?

👇
Generally calcifies our focus in a way that little room for
our movement in the direction Jae urges—and I believe our world demands.

We train lawyers with a very, very narrow view of their role in society. And then we impart great power (and obligation).

👇
We should not be surprised at our failings. AND we should be taking action to rectify the vast disparity between what we do (or what we *think* we do) and what current reality demands of us.

For decades, the late Deborah Rhode asked all of us to acknowledge and address

👇
this very issue: lawyers lead and we need them to lead, and lead well.

AND, we do very little (if anything) to prepare them for THIS. For leadership. For MORAL leadership. See "What Lawyers Lack: Leadership" https://t.co/OpixXwneqx.

What is the inflection point 👇
that will finally move us to action?

How bad does it really need to get?

I fear our proclivities (risk averse, skeptical, precedent-driven vs. forward-thinking) continue to constrain our evolution in ways that have dire consequences not only on the legal profession,
:dow 👇
but on the fabric of human society.

As battles wage over the regulatory structure of the legal profession, a truth remains: law is the operating system of human society.

And, even when we allow and empower others to fulfill meaningful, necessary roles in this system,
👇
the role of lawyers as leaders will remain.

The choices we make now — about how we (self)regulate, about how we (self)educate, about how we choose to fulfill our duties and obligations — have consequences so far beyond our current purview

👇
that we should be laser-focused on how we respond with a creative and proactive mindset to the enormous challenges and opportunities before us.

Lawyers: how will YOU lead?

/fin

More from Legal

1/

In light of this serious cyber attack and this being the second in a row that I've heard in the past few weeks, I'd like to take this moment to talk about the cyber attack known as #phishing so that others do not fall prey to it and stay safe online.

Thread starts:


2/

Phishing is usually a means of contacting you by impersonation to gather data, oversimplifying it. This can happen in several ways:
1. URL similarities: Usually when people visit a webpage, most people never check the URL (Uniform Resource Locator). For example, a fake URL of


3/

https://t.co/x0brAMyKgF would be https://t.co/HrdE9hklv1. Seem the same, right? No. I've replaced one single character of "L" in @Google with "I". Therefore, your entire data would be redirected to the server that is hosting GOOGIE, instead of GOOGLE. This is commonly

4/

hackers perform cyber attacks. However this is only one of many.
Many people might forward you genuine links with small "add-ons" which enter your system like a Trojan Horse. A beautiful meme of keyboard cat on the outside but a vicious data-mining link on the inside.
Plus


5/

There's also other means of doing this. And you might think "But dude, who's stupid enough to fall for it?"
LOTS of UNINFORMED people are.
2020 was a record breaking year for phishing websites and attacks as per @techradar. It's not just through

You May Also Like

1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Хајде да направимо мали осврт на случај Мика Алексић .

Алексић је жртва енглеске освете преко Оливере Иванчић .
Мика је одбио да снима филм о блаћењу Срба и мењању историје Срба , иза целокупног пројекта стоји дипломатски кор Британаца у Београду и Оливера Иванчић


Оливера Илинчић је иначе мајка једне од његових ученица .
Која је претила да ће се осветити .

Мика се налази у притвору због наводних оптужби глумице Милене Радуловић да ју је наводно силовао човек од 70 година , са три бајпаса и извађеном простатом пре пет година

Иста персона је и обезбедила финансије за филм преко Беча а филм је требао да се бави животом Десанке Максимовић .
А сетите се и ко је иницирао да се Десанка Максимовић избаци из уџбеника и школства у Србији .

И тако уместо романсиране верзије Десанке Максимовић утицај Британаца

У Србији стави на пиједестал и да се Британци у Србији позитивно афирмишу како би се на тај начин усмерила будућност али и мењао ток историје .
Зато Мика са гнушањем и поносно одбија да снима такав филм тада и почиње хајка и претње која потиче из британских дипломатских кругова

Најгоре од свега што је то Мика Алексић изговорио у присуству високих дипломатских представника , а одговор је био да се све неће на томе завршити и да ће га то скупо коштати .
Нашта им је Мика рекао да је он свој живот проживео и да могу да му раде шта хоће и силно их извређао